Sunday, October 31, 2010
Especially between students, could be met the practice of underlining or marking a chunk of text with special marker(s), highlighting the respective text as important, at least for a second review. The chunk of text could be a concept, a definition or a whole paragraph, and that’s actually the input for a K-map. In theory you could put the whole chunks of texts together on post-it or electronic documents, group them together in some way, and there you have a rudimentary K-map. Thus could be intuited that a K-map is a graphic organizer of chunks of texts identified as information or knowledge. Putting together row text allows structuring the content based on identified associations, it could be sequential structure, logical implication, importance, topic, etc. Are thus are created implied or explicit association between the various chunks of text. Further value could be added by breaking the text in smaller chunks, summarize a chunk in fewer words, replace words with more meaningful words, add numbering, symbols, other types of markings (e.g. NB = “nota bene”, QED = quod erat demonstrandum), references, questions, etc. Of course, the same could be done in the book itself though ignoring the fact that book’s owner or further readers could argue such methods, the value comes from having the chunks of text coming from different books in one place or, if you want, in fewer text containers, and the electronic documents make this approach such an easy task.
From a visual perspective, processing a whole chunk of text could be time consuming, especially when we look for specific information, typically key words, primary concepts, definitions, etc. Marking such text in special ways brings some additional value, though the linear character of text makes it still difficult to process. What if we break the text at conceptual level? Wouldn’t such output be easier to process? Now it depends also on each person’s capabilities, though working with concepts seems closer to the mental structure of our mind, in the way meaning is represented and created. What if we further represent the associations between concepts explicitly, giving them names, and thus associating other concepts with them? Wouldn’t be such structures easier to process and understand? Such structures would be also K-maps, though their content is more refined. Actually the concept-based and whole propositions could be mixed together in K-maps, the degree of refinement of such concepts being more a figure of taste or, as will be further seen, of philosophy.
Until now we considered a K-map as being an aggregation of chunks of text of various granularities, implied or explicit associations, and the later could be labeled using other more or less standardized concepts. We talked also about formatting, meaningful display, resources, symbols and other types of markings. These are in fact the content elements of a K-map, but in definitive what is a K-map?!
Extrapolating the above considerations, a Knowledge Map or K-map could be considered as a visual graphical tool used to aggregate and represent information or knowledge. The definition seems to need further refinement because the graphical character implies a visual component, representation could involve aggregation and thus the later term could be abandoned, while following the DIKW pyramid, knowledge involve information. Graphical is the form of representation, while the role of visual is to represent explicitly the channel of communication, in fact stressing its visual, respectively graphical character, a K-map could be considered as synonym to visual aid or graphical organizer, terms more frequent used, especially in teaching. No matter of the degree of knowledge encompassed, a representation of the knowledge is not the knowledge itself, it resumes thus to information that triggers knowledge and the associations existing between information. Thus, a K-map could be defined as a visual graphical tool used to represent information and the associations existing between them, either implicit or explicit. The term information encompasses here any type of symbols or chunk of texts. When information is present in its most granular form, at concept level, the K-map is a visual graphical tool used to represent concepts and the associations existing between them.
The definition of a K-map represent the “what” from the W5H1 syntagm, how about the why, who, when, how, by whom and by what means? Why a K-map, isn’t the text or what we know enough? Do we really have to break the knowledge into such maps? Maybe we don’t, it depends on each persons capacities, some of us have a really good memory, retain everything they read and recalled it any time. For others, such capabilities come with some effort, spending some time in memorizing the information we consider as useful for the future, and also this step depends on each person’s capabilities and skills. As mentioned in introduction, the read material could be “formatted”, broken into pieces, annotated, summarized, restructured in order to increase the efficiency of memorization and recall. According to researchers, in brain itself takes place some unconscious restructuring of information, associations are created, strengthened and removed, the later activity resulting in forgetting the information once stored, the recovery of such information necessitating a review of the source or sources used in the first place to acquire the respective information. Considering the huge amount of information our brain deals with, it’s almost impossible to identify during a simple read, all the connections existing between the various concepts assimilated, especially when they aren’t so evident. This perspective of what’s happening in our brain is quite simplistic, though can be discovered already some gaps in the learning process, gaps which in theory could be addressed with the help of K-maps. As its name and definition denote, a K-map has the function of a map, used to represent knowledge. Once such a map created, it would be easier for us to access it, and thus to refresh our information, eventually use it as a reference to the actual text. In addition, when evaluating the associations of such a map, existing or inexistent, we could identify new associations, conditions under which they hold (e.g. range of applicability, exceptions), new concepts, new contexts, etc. Let’s not forget that the human is a social being, the meaning of the concepts we deal with relying also their meaning at macro level – organizations, communities of practice, friends or any other types of groups. The individual maps could be used in order to compare and evaluate knowledge, collective collaborative and coordinative creation of K-maps coming with their benefits too. They could be used as a baseline for learning, negotiation, documentation or (self-) evaluation.
The creation of a K-map requires additional time, time we don’t always have. Does it really make sense to create such a map all the times? It’s probably recommended to create it when we acquire new knowledge, especially when we want to identify the concepts on which the respective chunk of knowledge is built upon. Once the backbone concepts mastered, the necessity of a map decreases to some degree, in the end its necessity depending on individual needs. A K-map could be useful also when externalizing the knowledge, especially the tacit knowledge, in organizations being quite a valuable tool in documenting the various types of information organization work with, process maps, flow maps, value stream maps, being several examples of such K-maps.
How to create a K-map? In definitive maybe we create such maps without knowing it, it’s built in our “ADN” as we often arrive to express complex thoughts by externalize them in diagrammatic form. There are more than 50 types of K-maps available in the literature: Concept Maps, Semantic Nets, Conceptual Graphs, Mind Maps, and so on. They have many similarities, often the similarities residing in the philosophies used to create them. Adhering to one or more of such maps is a question of need, preferences, habitude and requirement. Sometimes also deviations from the philosophy behind a map could prove to be useful as long satisfies a purpose, same as a map arrives to be misused, for example by placing too much content, be it irrelevant or relevant, or of using too much formatting, not respecting guidelines, etc. There are several requirements a K-map should satisfy – it should be simple to use and navigate, with an approachable level of complexity and thus understandability, adaptive and dynamic.
“By what means” could refer here to the tools used to create K-maps and the channels used to distribute them. Again it’s a question of need, preferences, habitude and requirements. In the past years appear many tools used for the creation of K-maps, having multiple features, but still lacking in representational content the human mind is used to. The paper and a crayon could prove efficient as well, while those with an exceptional memory could create such maps directly in the inner mental world. Everything is possible, everything it’s a question of practice and self-improvement of techniques.
 Hyerle, D. 2008. Thinking Maps®: A Visual Language for Learning. In: Thinking Maps®: A Visual Language for Learning, ISBN: 978-1-84800-149-7. [Online] Available from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/x57121720731381j/ (Accessed: 23 June 2009)
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
When I started this blog, it wasn’t in my intent to do meta-blogging (blogging about blogging), though a few days ago, while browsing through Linkedin posts, Nic Oliver’s question “Where have all the bloggers and commenters gone?” draw my attention. The question is rooted in his observation that a few social sites, he was member of, are registering an apparent decrease in the number of blogs and comments. Is it really this happening? The question preoccupies me not only as blogger and owner of a blog on web-related theme, but also as I’m interesting in the evolution of web and its trends. Until now I had no reasons to pose such a question, I mean even if the current blog had few visitors in the past month, this was also a consequence of the fact that lately I haven’t managed to post something new, however my sql-troubles blog acknowledges a considerable increase in the number of visitors, from about 50 users per week at the beginning of this year to about 250 users currently. I know that’s not a big number when compared with other professional blogs, though for beginning that’s even a little more than I expected. I could corroborate the increase in the number of visitors with the increase in the number of posts and the fact that I tried to post each week something.
A Look at Personal Navigation History
Looking back at my navigation history of the past months I have to recognize that I focused more on professional blogs, mainly on the MSDN blogs which are going through a considerable boom, probably a result of a change in strategy coming from Microsoft. Spending more time on content creation and reading of a several profession-related books, the time spent on reading others’ blogs decreased considerably. I even kind of neglected Linkedin in the detriment of Facebook, though the time spent on Facebook decreased considerably lately because of the lack of time corroborated with saturation in what concerns the wanted and not wanted content, from the later category I remark the Farm Ville and Mafia games content. I could add also the relatively small number of new features added to Facebook, feeling that something more could be done in this direction, especially in what concerns content filtering, categorizing and aggregation. I am remarking these facts also because the respective problems could apply to other social networks or blogging too, and from this point of view I have several person observations.
Personal Blogging Concerns
I’m using Blogspot since almost 5 years now, it’s a nice blogging platform, though with a few exceptions the number of important new features since then is quite small, lacking several important features. The best example is the editor which provides few built-in html functionality when compared with the HTML tags available in HTML4 or newly HTML5. Sure, the HTML editor supports in theory all HTML tags though they need to be entered manually, and this equates with considerable effort from my part in some cases, especially when I consider the programming language code that needs special formatting in order to be easily readable. I found myself in the position to appeal from necessity to an editor like Windows Live Writer, though it has its issues too. To content formatting adds content presentation, in this category falling blog’s layout, quite inflexible from some points of view, and content categorization. Labeling and clouds are great in order to highlight important keywords, though I feel something more could be done in this direction, for example aggregating labels in categories or in Knowledge Maps.
Another important problem for myself is commenting, and here are several aspects. First, and maybe the most important aspect related to users authentication for commentaries, some of the blogs request a user to be logged in in order to comment, sure some of the websites are integrated with Facebook, Twitter or myOpenID credentials, though not all the users have and want to create a new account for this purpose (SideWiki it’s out of discussion here as it’s not integrated directly in the blogs). Secondly, the comments have poor or inexistent rich formatting, often resuming to text messages. Third aspect: it would be useful to have more flexibility in what concerns the notification when a new comment is posted. Fourth aspect: also comments require sometimes some categorization, especially in what concerns in filtering out adulatory or irrelevant content. Fifth aspect: annotation, one of the important features of the Read-Write web is almost inexistent.
All the above aspects could in theory make users a little unsatisfied with the blogging experience and reflect thus in a possible decrease in the number of blogs, posts or comments. In order to understand what’s happening we have to go deeper and understand the value of blogs for both, bloggers and readers, the important link between the two being the content. I was thinking that maybe we reached a content saturation point in which bloggers have less to say, the important subjects being exhausted. Maybe we reached also a break-even point between request and demand in what concerns the content reached an equilibrium in some domains, the variety and coverage of content facilitating this. Maybe the readers lost their interest, in definitive they want to be entertained, otherwise they’ll find another entertainer. Now not sure how many bloggers want to be in the position of an entertainer…
Time and Satisfaction as Drivers
As I was highlighting above, also the available time for blogging is a problem as good content and comments requires time, often some research in addition to the personal experience, from the later perspective the subjects could drain, bloggers having nothing more important to say (I actually have seen a few blogs closed because of that). The inverse ratio between time spent on one side and financial or personal satisfaction on the other side is possible to have depleted over time. For sure many people are blogging because they have something important to tell the world on professional and non-professional themes. It’s not only the interest but also some satisfaction involved, either financial or appreciative. The financial outcomes are quite small, resulting from ads and number of clicks gathered, the relevance of ads’ content being quite an important factor, and here I’m having some personal complaints too. The appreciative satisfaction is somewhat reflected in the number of visitors, the comments they post and the value they have for the blogger, and I would say that’s quite an important factor. I have also to remark the destructive/pejorative intent of some of the comments, many readers lacking in some basic blogging and social web ethics, being inclined to denigrate rather than criticize constructively. To this adds the volume of spam, the use of captchas, excepting their role of reducing the quota of spam, have the side effect of annoying the commenter, in some situation the use of captchas being totally badly-designed.
A considerable number of blogs were just reflecting personal non-technical events from bloggers’ life, social networks like Facebook absorbing increasingly such content, and from this perspective I have to recognize that they are more appropriate for this purpose. Probably many commenters moved to the (social) professional networks, having more freedom in posting the questions, and potentially more experts, and thus a higher number and diversity of opinions, plus the feedback seems to function better. In addition, the professional nature of such networks could bring in theory more value than the blogs, the marriage between blogs and professional networks being the logical and maybe necessary move, though this requires a richer integration between the two platforms.
Maybe readers have started to do some research by themselves or learned to use online encyclopedias like Wikipedia that offer a good inverse ratio between content on one side and complexity, variety, spread, navigation on the other side. Maybe the users moved to the video content, richer in visual and auditive experience, many universities, companies, professionals and non-professional posting their webcasts or radiocasts online, collections like YouTube/Edu being a good example. Or maybe the users are too demoralized because of the crisis, sure that’s a forced possible cause, though in the end also the socio-economical factors should be considered.
I was wondering how many bloggers moved their blogs between the various platforms or they totally abandoned their blogs or how many readers comment actually what they read. Even if I’m a little reticent to the way some statistics on the web reflect the reality as long I don’t know the background and the way they were collected, they could be used at least as approximation/trending. Technorati through its State of Blogosphere annual report seems the most quoted source for such statistics, though the report for 2010 it’s not already available, while the statistics for the previous years seems to be dispersed across several posts. Here are some important facts related indirectly to the current topic quoted by SEJ from Technorati:
- 77% of Internet users read blogs
- 70% of all respondents say that personal satisfaction is a way they measure the success of their blog
- the most common rate of updating is 2-3 times per week
Unfortunately no number in what concerns my three above concerns. Anyway, several blogs, for example Caslon Analytics blogging and PCMag.com, are quoting an old report coming from Perseus, in which is estimated that about 66% of the blogs are temporarily or permanently abandoned after two months. I wanted to dig more into the topic but the time and the ocean of information, in which is still difficult to search for relevant information, made me stop here…